From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <tkoenig@netcologne.de>
Received: from cc-smtpout1.netcologne.de (cc-smtpout1.netcologne.de
 [89.1.8.211]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 896ED3945C0F
 for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 16:52:33 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 896ED3945C0F
Received: from cc-smtpin3.netcologne.de (cc-smtpin3.netcologne.de [89.1.8.203])
 by cc-smtpout1.netcologne.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33E421292D;
 Tue, 13 Apr 2021 18:52:31 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by cc-smtpin3.netcologne.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F2A911E97;
 Tue, 13 Apr 2021 18:52:31 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [2001:4dd7:993:0:7285:c2ff:fe6c:992d]
 (helo=cc-smtpin3.netcologne.de)
 by localhost with ESMTP (eXpurgate 4.19.0)
 (envelope-from <tkoenig@netcologne.de>)
 id 6075cc4f-07cc-7f0000012729-7f00000194f0-1
 for <multiple-recipients>; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 18:52:31 +0200
Received: from [IPv6:2001:4dd7:993:0:7285:c2ff:fe6c:992d]
 (2001-4dd7-993-0-7285-c2ff-fe6c-992d.ipv6dyn.netcologne.de
 [IPv6:2001:4dd7:993:0:7285:c2ff:fe6c:992d])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by cc-smtpin3.netcologne.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA;
 Tue, 13 Apr 2021 18:52:23 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF
To: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>,
 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>, Nathan Sidwell <nathan@acm.org>
Cc: Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford@googlemail.com>,
 GCC Development <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>, Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>,
 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
References: <cfea5434-d6d6-9b96-af18-75e3288b637c@acm.org>
 <20210330151656.00007e20@tesio.it>
 <CANHA4OhBcjvbLne1nHbQLVC5H+t5vtRsrLn14vR9qr_2HbRXxA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210330232849.00001697@tesio.it> <20210331113417.GU2685@wildebeest.org>
 <CAH6eHdQ8ZyhNS-ZDYXnv-HWr+RojTWPt4T-iVGJ56kjtW9xJgw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210406222225.GF2711@wildebeest.org>
 <5547d308f400aa62746b421dad2968dd6321aeae.camel@redhat.com>
 <20210408194826.GB30119@wildebeest.org> <87y2dplyy5.fsf@googlemail.com>
 <CAH6eHdS=rK0E5+_5cA5PzBG2Z0ixBHPqFTZviDjC_7Pzm7LhzA@mail.gmail.com>
 <5ce167be-d5ea-1261-9238-4ee1c6a2150b@hesbynett.no>
 <CAH6eHdQ4rGS+8tS0Bsw8kordOErHm_F7tnp605XCqta3ficX0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFiYyc1zAuL1Ydvf42SdGNDQ57Zry7on63NZn_hJdFVeapj8PA@mail.gmail.com>
 <b816b847-45b7-2705-0531-1e578a579439@acm.org>
 <CAFiYyc0OBwRp6J48wEa7AjEWCNp3uq5Log36KhuUXxAW1hwfQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <81abf7b0-cc9e-78d3-c254-8581bce8edd6@gmail.com>
From: Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de>
Message-ID: <1b73a3d2-4e7e-d226-ccc6-5002997b1ea0@netcologne.de>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 18:52:23 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <81abf7b0-cc9e-78d3-c254-8581bce8edd6@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,
 DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,
 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,
 TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc mailing list <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc>,
 <mailto:gcc-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc>,
 <mailto:gcc-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 16:52:35 -0000

On 13.04.21 16:40, Jeff Law via Gcc wrote:
> An EGCS-like split like we had in the late 90s is, IMHO, a definite 
> possibility here

Such a move would, in all probability, leave both parts of the split
GCC with too few developers to compete against LLVM, thus rendering
GCC irrelevant and ruining an important project for free software.

(I don't like the idea, for the record).